GB9
Topic: Event 3 GB9 Northern Masters

If the tour was to revert to the pro/chal/main format and the main was held on the Saturday surely a player would then only need to pay hotel costs for one night as the challenge could be on the Friday (challenge players no need to stay over for Sunday unless they want to) and pro players would only have to arrive on the Saturday morning for the main and stay one night for the pro cup on the Sunday - if this was the way it used to work then I stand corrected but I'm almost certain there was a compulsory 2 night stay when the tour was at the Barcelo. Money saved by the player immediately.
If the tour wants to attract the Europeans then why not try and collaborate with the Eurotour. One event to remain as a doubl-elim with points toward the Eurotour up for grabs. Easier said than done...

No matter what you do entry fee wise the hotel is still going to be compulsory because of how much the room would cost to hire otherwise. IMO dropping the entry by 50 wont make a blind bit of difference, still gonna be £200 before youve hit a ball...

IMO at the moment the tour is only good value for the top players i personally dont mind as can hold my own sometimes lol but i cant see the lesser players continuing as its just to hard to cash or even win a few rounds. im 100% behind it returning to how it was last season or just doing a Pro and a Challonge. The tour isnt about the 10 top players its about the 70 others and previously 110 others sounds harsh but o so true

Only thinking that because it's been mentioned that the tables are "almost" paid for. So when they're paid for in full that's an overhead saved. I'm not sure what this would amount to, or what balance is left, but a long term supporter of the tour would want to see that saving passed down to the player.
As a non-tour member Mark I'm just on the outside looking in. I've attended events as a spectator and been so impressed with what I've seen. Lee, Andy and the team do a cracking job and I'm sure with the members input they can further improve the tour next year.

I think you're right Phil. Pro, Challenge and Main properly fills out the weekend for everyone and gives the lesser players an incentive to play as they can realistically cash in the challenge event, whereas with the current format they cant.

For what it's worth my opinion is to go back to the challenge, pro and main.
Would it be possible to hold the 3 separate tournaments on 3 separate days, therefore everyone playing would know what nights they need to stay at the hotel in advance instead of working it out if you need the second night or not as you go.

Challenge cup - Friday
Main event - Saturday
Pro cup - Sunday

I understand wanting to expand to get some top Europeans over with the double elim format but is it worth losing 10 British players to gain 1 European?

I guess it's all trial and error, i'll be there regardless but would be a way of possibly getting the numbers back up.

I like this idea. Most people probably would have to use annual leave for the Friday anyway so maybe an option is to start earlier on the Friday and turn it into a 3 day event?

Friday & Saturday night accommodation as it is anyway wouldn't be affected. Keep the entry fees the same so prize fund would be the same.

Maybe this would entice more folk to enter. Who knows??????

I totally agree about giving 'the lesser' players better value and bringing back the Main/Challenge/Pro type idea. Times are tough for everyone currently and regardless of individuals circumstances value for money is the key. I personally am missing being a part of GB9 however what i have i work hard for and i can't justify 'giving away' around a grand or more for a few shots and bit of practice against a top player.

Mark, you state that 'the tables weren't paid off as planned and we're now touring so that's two "Extra" costs this year', as an example but surely the organisers were aware of this.

Why therefore increase costs further and tour this year if the tables weren't paid off? This in itself puts the costs up, never mind transporting the tables each time/storage etc etc., This in turn meant that even if the same 120 as last year signed up prize money would have had to have been reduced due to 'the added extra cost'.

Add a change of format in to the equation and it spells bad practice with bad business decisions....simple. I know supporters of GB9 won't like me saying it but that's the fact of the matter and i apologise if it offends anyone but sometimes the truth hurts. I have the utmost respect for what Lee, Andy and everyone has done and the hard work they put in but it's a business and businesses fail through 'not listening to it's customers' (the players)
'poor cash flow' (players not signing up)
'poor business decisions' (changing formats & touring at a vulnerable time)

I want GB9 to succeed. I want GB9 to be successful. And I want to be a part of GB9 again when i feel it's good value. I really hope this is a small blip and hope Lee etc don't take offence at what i am saying but i can't help voicing my opinion as i am passionate only about two things................business & pool

Dean

good shout deano

hopefully il be back playing the game again soon along with maybe 3 or 4 lads who are hopefully joinging the tour again

pro-main-challenge for me

Totally agree deano. Touring was probably a bad decision, but one that had to be made early on in last year so hotels could be reserved (which lee explained at E1). I appreciate this is a business and there has been some bad decisions that forced a few away. Hopefully we can get these resolved and get the tour back on track next year.

I think the key to this topic is that 'value is king'.

I think more regular player meetings and players actually speaking out is a must next year...

Totally agree deano. Touring was probably a bad decision, but one that had to be made early on in last year so hotels could be reserved (which lee explained at E1). I appreciate this is a business and there has been some bad decisions that forced a few away. Hopefully we can get these resolved and get the tour back on track next year.

I think the key to this topic is that 'value is king'.

I think more regular player meetings and players actually speaking out is a must next year...

Totally agree deano. Touring was probably a bad decision, but one that had to be made early on in last year so hotels could be reserved (which lee explained at E1). I appreciate this is a business and there has been some bad decisions that forced a few away. Hopefully we can get these resolved and get the tour back on track next year.

I think the key to this topic is that 'value is king'.

I think more regular player meetings and players actually speaking out is a must next year...

Totally agree deano. Touring was probably a bad decision, but one that had to be made early on in last year so hotels could be reserved (which lee explained at E1). I appreciate this is a business and there has been some bad decisions that forced a few away. Hopefully we can get these resolved and get the tour back on track next year.

I think the key to this topic is that 'value is king'.

I think more regular player meetings and players actually speaking out is a must next year...

Totally agree deano. Touring was probably a bad decision, but one that had to be made early on in last year so hotels could be reserved (which lee explained at E1). I appreciate this is a business and there has been some bad decisions that forced a few away. Hopefully we can get these resolved and get the tour back on track next year.

I think the key to this topic is that 'value is king'.

I think more regular player meetings and players actually speaking out is a must next year...

Incredible how people pass judgements on websites about people's decision making and planning abilities without knowing the full facts. This is what I really hate about the game. Good thread until then.

We really need Deano on the committee because we're all ****ing idiots who can't make a business decision.

I agree...



Maybe its just me but id rather go to a GB9 with 128 people there with a top prize of £1400 than a tournament with 80 people there with a top prize of £1400

Yes riggers there was a lot of good thoughts until then

No one said you were an idiot Lee. It was pointed out by someone else that reduced prize money & lack of numbers (both of which are facts for everyone to see) are down to the tables not yet being paid off yet and the extra costs involved in now touring. I simply stated that surely the organisers were aware of this previously & therefore coupled with the change in format it was a bad business decision.

We've all made bad decisions, it's part of trying something new & evolving & maybe if you accepted that instead getting on the defensive everytime says something you don't like things would improve.

Thanks for the offer of the committee post, however with your attitude there's no point having a commitee when no one else is allowed an opinion!

And maybe the decision to tour actually increased participation from '50 odd' to '80 odd', making it a very good decision. Nobody knows.

Also, somebody earlier commented that only 1% of players played for the money. I'm no Rachel Vorderman but in a field of 80 that person should be pretty easy to spot. I'm guessing a more accurate estimate is around 10% of any field.

Like I said, you have an opinion on a website but you don't know the facts. I'm glad you don't run my business if that's a measure of your judgement.